Ann Coulter

ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
oisin said:
lol a socialized monetary system is exactly what america needs. the only other option is capitalism u moron.

im not even american but i cant stand here and watch a fucking great country be brain-washed by a right wing demolishion crew. thank fucking god dems obtained congress at least
Click to expand...
OK ... now let's see if you can post something of substance.

1. What, in your opinion is a "socialized money system?"

2. What, in your opinion, is a better option to capitalism? Unemployment rate in your country? Your tax rate? Your standard of living? Your interpretation of success?

Vi

PS: Please try to refrain from the personal attacks ... they are not necessary to make your points ... unless of course, you really have nothing concrete to say.
 
O

oisin

Active Member
ViRedd said:
OK ... now let's see if you can post something of substance.

1. What, in your opinion is a "socialized money system?"

2. What, in your opinion, is a better option to capitalism? Unemployment rate in your country? Your tax rate? Your standard of living? Your interpretation of success?

Vi

PS: Please try to refrain from the personal attacks ... they are not necessary to make your points ... unless of course, you really have nothing concrete to say.
Click to expand...

come on man we are having a debate stop trying your hardest to undermine me.

a socialized monetary policy is a place, so to speak, hovering in between capitalism and communism. it effectively means the government and the people work together to support our economy. (correct me if im wrong!) truthfuly there is no better option to anything. democracy is the best thing we have and to be honest us citizens should not be fighting amongst ourselves but should be fighting against the government whose only interest is themselves. no matter if they are dems or reps, we should be constantly holding them to account as individuals. that is why liberalism is a better option. it allows individuals to speak out against anything or FOR anything (in theory of course). whereas the same can hardly be said about conservatism. when you have such leaders as bush and cheney, they with their sole ambition of earning money and killing "dark skinned people", the right choice should be obvious to anyone. ann coulter is not an educated person, she is simply a lost cause who has been brainwashed by the wrong people.

just out of interest, you didnt happen to see the short movies shown in the red states during the 2000 election run ups? demonising democrats and accusing them of outrageous acts which were simply untrue. they also tried to emphasize that if you vote republican, god will love you....its absurd, but its how a slim majority of people live in america and shows where their values lie, i.e. ignorance is bliss. i simply feel sorry for these right wing exeremists living in virtual solitude of things like culture, entertainment and actual piece of mind.

edit* sorry forgot, i believe privatisation is the only way forward. to introduce COMPETITION and decrease prices. it would open up space for employment and lower taxes in the long run. take OPEC for example. this is a perfect example of an unfair money making scam. they more or less own 100percent of the western worlds oil, which is why prices have gone up insanly since "THE WAR ON TERROR". i live in ireland myself and i can tell you the price of oil here has more than quadrupled in the last year alone. since the war started i cant even tell you how much it costs to run my car now. AND WE WERENT EVEN REMOTELY INVOLED IN THE WAR! in fact we have NEVER been involved in ANY war. this, my friend, is why i am no supporter of the bush regime, nor republicans.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
Oisin, a voice of reason, as you can tell, ViRedd is no fan of liberalism. If he had his way, we'd be up against the wall. Welcome to the site and glad to have someone with a soul posting here. You'll find a few soul less people here, so be prepared to get their wrath, again welcome. we see the Bush regime in the same light, a ruthless dictatorial asshole with extreme waring tendecies, one that has fucked over many people from a lot of countries. Like you say, in Ireland the price of fuel has quadrupled, Nice, Bushs' fault!
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Oisin ...

Thanks for your well thought out post ... it is much appreciated. You and I really don't differ much, if at all. Here's the rub: Your definition of "liberal" and "liberalism" is taken from the original definition. The way you describe yourself, makes me belive that your are a liberal in the Jeffersonian sense. Same here. But ... that form of liberalism is not what is represented by the Democratic Party and their "By Rote" followers like our esteemed member Medicinman. Nope, they are not into free markets and competition. They are into an ever larger and more powerful government. They are into wealth redistribution. They are not for equal opportunity, instead, they are for equal outcomes. In other words, there are two types of liberals ... the old school, like our founders were, and the new school, that absconded with the term "liberal" around the turn of the last century in order to disguise their true agenda. These people are hard-left progressives who lean very much to the side of Marxism. To see the extent they go to, just go back and read Medicineman's posts. Folks like him are into class envy, wealth redistribution, one world governments, a one world court system, a one world banking system, a one world currency and an international wealth redistribution system. They are the enemy of exactly what you stood for in your last post. My enemy as well and the enemy of all liberty devotees everywhere.

The shame of these people is that they do not have the courage, or the ethics, to say what they really support ... and that is slavery. In fact, the real shame is that most, like Medicineman, don't even realize that that is where their final destination would lead us all.

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
Oisin ...

Thanks for your well thought out post ... it is much appreciated. You and I really don't differ much, if at all. Here's the rub: Your definition of "liberal" and "liberalism" is taken from the original definition. The way you describe yourself, makes me belive that your are a liberal in the Jeffersonian sense. Same here. But ... that form of liberalism is not what is represented by the Democratic Party and their "By Rote" followers like our esteemed member Medicinman. Nope, they are not into free markets and competition. They are into an ever larger and more powerful government. They are into wealth redistribution. They are not for equal opportunity, instead, they are for equal outcomes. In other words, there are two types of liberals ... the old school, like our founders were, and the new school, that absconded with the term "liberal" around the turn of the last century in order to disguise their true agenda. These people are hard-left progressives who lean very much to the side of Marxism. To see the extent they go to, just go back and read Medicineman's posts. Folks like him are into class envy, wealth redistribution, one world governments, a one world court system, a one world banking system, a one world currency and an international wealth redistribution system. They are the enemy of exactly what you stood for in your last post. My enemy as well and the enemy of all liberty devotees everywhere.

The shame of these people is that they do not have the courage, or the ethics, to say what they really support ... and that is slavery. In fact, the real shame is that most, like Medicineman, don't even realize that that is where their final destination would lead us all.

Vi
Click to expand...
Man what a load of crap. You are so good at judging others that you have entirely missed the mark here buster. I'll not even grace your post with a response except to say you're 90% wrong. You'd do well to look after your own views and quit trying to describe mine, you have missed the mark completely!
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Man what a load of crap. You are so good at judging others that you have entirely missed the mark here buster. I'll not even grace your post with a response except to say you're 90% wrong. You'd do well to look after your own views and quit trying to describe mine, you have missed the mark completely!

OK, if I've missed the mark, tell us where. Have the courage to say what you REALLY stand for, Med.

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
OK, if I've missed the mark, tell us where. Have the courage to say what you REALLY stand for, Med.

I sure as hell don't stand for the current onslaught of freedom bashing by G.W. I thought you were for freedom. Why don't you attack Bush with the venemosity that you attack me with. Are you for all those impingements on your freedom? and please dont play dumbass and ask me to list them. If you've been even half awake during the last 6 years you should be shouting ar the top of your voice about the absurdities of the Bush administration. Please don't lower your self to the point of condoning these atrocities. Your either for him or against him. I'll give you the same choices you give me. What's it gonna be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top